IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v37y2019i2p151-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opportunities and challenges in the new innovation landscape: Implications for innovation auditing and innovation management

Author

Listed:
  • Frishammar, Johan
  • Richtnér, Anders
  • Brattström, Anna
  • Magnusson, Mats
  • Björk, Jennie

Abstract

Innovation auditing is a well-established practice used by managers to identify strengths and weaknesses in innovation. Existing audit frameworks fall short, however, because they neglect three major trends that currently transform the innovation landscape. These trends are as follows: 1) a shift from closed to more open models of innovation (“openness”), 2) a shift from providing physical products to industrial product–services (“servitization”), and 3) a shift from an analog to a highly digitalized world (“digitalization”). This article identifies new innovation practices, opportunities, and challenges that arise for manufacturing firms along these trends. The article proposes a revised innovation audit framework, which acknowledges these trends and supports innovation management in increasingly dynamic and competitive environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Frishammar, Johan & Richtnér, Anders & Brattström, Anna & Magnusson, Mats & Björk, Jennie, 2019. "Opportunities and challenges in the new innovation landscape: Implications for innovation auditing and innovation management," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-164.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:37:y:2019:i:2:p:151-164
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2018.05.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237318300653
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2018.05.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    2. Cenamor, J. & Rönnberg Sjödin, D. & Parida, V., 2017. "Adopting a platform approach in servitization: Leveraging the value of digitalization," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 54-65.
    3. Hussinger, Katrin & Wastyn, Annelies, 2011. "In search for the not-invented-here syndrome: The role of knowledge sources and firm success," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-048, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    5. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    6. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    7. Alexander McKelvie & Anna Brattström & Karl Wennberg, 2017. "How young firms achieve growth: reconciling the roles of growth motivation and innovative activities," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 273-293, August.
    8. Wolfgang Ulaga & Werner Reinartz, 2011. "Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully," Post-Print hal-00642039, HAL.
    9. Gianni Lorenzoni & Andrea Lipparini, 1999. "The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 317-338, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kabadurmus, Ozgur & Kayikci, Yaşanur & Demir, Sercan & Koc, Basar, 2023. "A data-driven decision support system with smart packaging in grocery store supply chains during outbreaks," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. Negruţiu Cristian & Onea Alexandra & Bădescu Ruxandra, 2020. "Innovation trends in Romanian logistics providers industry," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 807-818, July.
    3. Pizzi, Simone & Venturelli, Andrea & Variale, Michele & Macario, Giuseppe Pio, 2021. "Assessing the impacts of digital transformation on internal auditing: A bibliometric analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Ogink, Ruben H.A.J. & Goossen, Martin C. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Akkermans, Henk, 2023. "Mechanisms in open innovation: A review and synthesis of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Amann, Marie & Granström, Gabriel & Frishammar, Johan & Elfsberg, Jenny, 2022. "Mitigating not-invented-here and not-sold-here problems: The role of corporate innovation hubs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Xuejun Jin & Xiao Pan, 2023. "Government Attention, Market Competition and Firm Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-27, June.
    7. Andronikidis, Andreas & Karolidis, Dimitrios & Zafeiriou, Georgia, 2021. "Reflections on grounding firm innovation and viability," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 2-8.
    8. Jaureguy, Micaela Vidal & Bianchi, Carlos & Blanchard, Pablo, 2023. "Financial and knowledge barriers to innovation: Complementary and substitution effects on innovative effort," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    9. Tseng, Ming-Lang & Bui, Tat-Dat & Lan, Shulin & Lim, Ming K. & Mashud, Abu Hashan Md, 2021. "Smart product service system hierarchical model in banking industry under uncertainties," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lopes, Ana Paula Vilas Boas Viveiros & de Carvalho, Marly Monteiro, 2018. "Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: Towards a contingent conceptual model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 284-298.
    2. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kokshagina, Olga & Le Masson, Pascal & Bories, Florent, 2017. "Fast-connecting search practices: On the role of open innovation intermediary to accelerate the absorptive capacity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 232-239.
    4. Kathleen Diener & Dirk Luettgens & Frank Thomas Piller, 2019. "Intermediation For Open Innovation: Comparing Direct Versus Delegated Search Strategies Of Innovation Intermediaries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-20, June.
    5. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    6. El Maalouf, Nicole & Bahemia, Hanna, 2023. "The implementation of inbound open innovation at the firm level: A dynamic capability perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    7. Saebi, Tina & Foss, Nicolai J., 2015. "Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 201-213.
    8. Shaikh, Maha & Levina, Natalia, 2019. "Selecting an open innovation community as an alliance partner: Looking for healthy communities and ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    9. Henkel, Joachim & Schöberl, Simone & Alexy, Oliver, 2014. "The emergence of openness: How and why firms adopt selective revealing in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 879-890.
    10. Cappa, Francesco & Oriani, Raffaele & Pinelli, Michele & De Massis, Alfredo, 2019. "When does crowdsourcing benefit firm stock market performance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    11. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    12. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    13. Mario Schaarschmidt & Dirk Homscheid & Thomas Kilian, 2019. "Application Developer Engagement In Open Software Platforms: An Empirical Study Of Apple Ios And Google Android Developers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-33, May.
    14. Hossain, Mokter, 2018. "Motivations, challenges, and opportunities of successful solvers on an innovation intermediary platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 67-73.
    15. A. Lasagni, 2011. "European SMEs, external relationships and innovation: some empirical evidence," Economics Department Working Papers 2011-EP04, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    16. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    17. Jakob Pohlisch, 2020. "Internal Open Innovation—Lessons Learned from Internal Crowdsourcing at SAP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, May.
    18. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    19. Yan Huang & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2014. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas Under Consumer Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(9), pages 2138-2159, September.
    20. Jose-Luis Hervas-Oliver, 2012. "Are technological gatekeepers constraining my cluster? Unfolding the paradox of gatekeepers resilience across cluster life cycle stages," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1206, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised May 2012.
    21. Dey, Anamika & Gupta, Anil K., 2016. "Empathetic climate resilient frugal innovations for sustainable communities," IIMA Working Papers WP2016-03-53, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:37:y:2019:i:2:p:151-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.